On Thursday 18 September 2008 10:17 AM Ham writes to Bo:
 
<snip>
How does a "new insight come along" and where does it come from?
The MoQist would say that it comes from Quality, or is a pattern of DQ.  I
believe that the value-sensibility which constructs the universe as a
relational system also commands the intellect to realize its order and
cogency as  "insight".  Neither the value that is sensed nor the awareness
that senses it is an "existent".  All insight is proprietary to the
individual observer.  And that includes the appearance of physical phenomena
(i.e., experiential reality).
 
Now let me turn the tables and ask you a fundamental question:
Do you believe that this ordered universe, "the metaphysical equivalent to
Newton's physical revolution", exists independently of its realization by
the cognizant mind?  In other words, can a universe exist without sensible
awareness?  That, I think, is the fundamental issue in this discussion.
 
On Monday 15 September 2008 5:19 PM Ham writes to Marsha:
 
<snip>
You see, Marsha, for the essentialist Essence is static and immutable,
impervious to the conditions of finitude.  It is existence which is
differentiated and transient.  And this is because the locus of subjective
experience -- individuated awareness -- is detached from the essential
source, thus limited in its perspective.  In biblical terms, we "see through
a glass, darkly."  What we see is a finitely differentiated "reduction" of
the absolute source.
 
Tell me, Marsha: Does Pirsig acknowledge DQ as the primary source?  IS there
a primary source in the MoQ?  If you can't answer this  affirmatively, then
I would submit to you that the Quality hierarchy has no fundamental reality
and is merely a paradigm for experiential existence.
 
Hi Ham and all, 
 
You ask Bo: ³Do you believe that this ordered universe, "the metaphysical
equivalent to Newton's physical revolution", exists independently of its
realization by the cognizant mind?  In other words, can a universe exist
without sensible awareness?²
 
You tell Marsha: ³It is existence which is differentiated and transient.²
And you give the reason for the affirmation: ³And this is because the locus
of subjective experience -- individuated awareness -- is detached from the
essential source, thus limited in its perspective.²
 
I ask you Ham, How does an individual sentient rise above individuated
awareness?  Your answer is revelation describes the essential source by
analogy. In biblical terms, we  ³see through a glass, darkly.²
 
IMO DQ is undefined in that it acknowledges an evolution in existence of
seven levels.  That is not in revelation.  God is in revelation!  Does God
evolve?  I surmise your answer is NO! and your have the source for
³essence². This is your belief system. Why do you feel you can convince me
(a member of MOQ_discuss) that your belief is more real than a DQ/SQ
metaphysics?
 
Joe   



On 9/18/08 10:17 AM, "Ham Priday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Hi Bo [Ron mentioned] --
> 
> After I said that Aristotle is not to be faulted for launching the objective
> approach to knowledge (which some regard as "intellectual"), you fault me
> for doing the same thing ...
> 
>> Right, here is the crux where you are well-meaning but wrong.
>> Science is the essence of the intellectual level, that of a human
>> mind exploring a physical universe. Philosophy on the other
>> hand believes itself to be above science, but is firmly based
>> on the same S/O-intellectual outlook. This includes your own
>> Essence, and Pirsig's Quality as essence with the MOQ a
>> theoretical ordering.  The true MOQ is the DQ/SQ divide,
>> this is the metaphysical equivalent to Newton's physical
>> revolution.
> 
> "Essence of the intellectual level" is meaningless to me as a definition of
> Science.  If you mean that experiential knowledge is the goal of Science, I
> would agree.  Scientific methodology is the logical approach to
> understanding physical reality.  But physical reality is not the primary
> essence, and as I've said previously, objective knowledge is not wisdom
> (true insight), and Science is not Philosophy.
> 
>> This is what the Newton example in ZAMM says:
>> A great new insight/revelation comes along and in a
>> crystallizing process it transforms the future, present
>> and PAST in its picture. That you (Ham) don't get this
>> message, but go on thinking that intellect is the ordering
>> mind is forgivable, but that the moqists around this site
>> ignore it is a tragedy.
> 
> How does a "new insight come along" and where does it come from?
> The MoQist would say that it comes from Quality, or is a pattern of DQ.
> I believe that the value-sensibility which constructs the universe as a
> relational system also commands the intellect to realize its order and
> cogency as  "insight".  Neither the value that is sensed nor the awareness
> that senses it is an "existent".  All insight is proprietary to the
> individual observer.  And that includes the appearance of physical phenomena
> (i.e., experiential reality).
> 
> Now let me turn the tables and ask you a fundamental question:
> Do you believe that this ordered universe, "the metaphysical equivalent to
> Newton's physical revolution", exists independently of its realization by
> the cognizant mind?  In other words, can a universe exist without sensible
> awareness?  That, I think, is the fundamental issue in this discussion.
> 
>> What Ron "understands" I don't know, but lets keep it fundamental.
> 
> Alas, I don't know what Ron really "believes", either.  However, it would be
> wrong to dismiss his respect for fundamental principles and their logical
> presentation, which is the bread and butter of philosophical dialectic.
> 
> Thanks, Bo.
> 
> Essentially yours,
> Ham
> 
> 
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/


Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to